How the LA Times uncovered the salary scandal in Bell, CA

The salary scandal out of Bell, CA has been making headlines for a few months now. NPR has a fascinating look at how it all came together.

Like many great discoveries, it happened by accident. The LA Times reporter was initially looking into the finances of a neighboring city when he caught wind of an investigation going on in Bell, CA. Then he followed up with repeated requests for interviews and public records. With that information, he was able to piece the story together.

Here is my favorite quote from the account, partly because it so similar to the resistance TransparentNevada has faced in getting salary data from a few counties throughout the state:

"Literally every day, I'm calling the city clerk," [LA Times editor] Gottlieb said. "I'm telling her, 'Listen, are we getting the documents? I really don't want to sue you, but we will, and when we go to court, and we win, because we will, we'll ask the judge to make you pay our legal bills, because that's what the [public records] statute says.'"

Bravo, LA Times.

Judicial transparency needs work

The RJ nails it:

The judge who attempted to overturn the Obama administration's moratorium on deep-water oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico following this summer's BP oil spill owned up to $15,000 in Exxon Mobil stock and that company had one of the 33 existing exploratory rigs shut down by the drilling ban.

But the public did not know U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman owned Exxon Mobil stock because his financial disclosure report -- though required by law -- was not available.

While Judge Feldman might have reached the same decision even if he didn't own any Exxon Mobil stock, the fact that he did leaves a cloud hanging over his decision.

Our judiciary only works when the people trust its independence. Simple appearances of impropriety are enough to erode that trust. If Judge Feldman had cared about the public trust, he should have recused himself from the proceedings immediately upon learning of his financial ties to Exxon Mobil.

Transparency in the AG race

AGWatch is out with a new survey that examines where candidates for Attorney General from across the nation stand on important issues including using outside counsel and contingency fee contracts.

Earlier this year, AGWatch asked 70 candidates for attorney general in 29 states to respond to a survey on the use of outside counsel and contingency fee contracts, an issue of great interest to many voters and taxpayers. The "2010 State Attorney General Candidate Questionnaire" solicits responses from candidates about their positions on five good government principles – disclosure, value, oversight, reporting, and accountability – and is intended to gauge how candidates for state attorney general, if elected, would hire and use outside counsel on behalf of the state. (Emphasis mine)

In Nevada, challengers Travis Barrick (R) and Joel Hansen (IAP) both responded to the survey while incumbent Catherine Cortez-Masto (D) did not. Cortez-Masto, it should be noted, also did not respond to TransparentNevada's recent candidate survey on transparency issues while Barrick and Hansen both did.

Transparency and the "Pledge to America"

Yesterday, House Republicans released their "Pledge to America," a 48 page document that details their legislative priorities if they win back the House in November.

I urge you to read the whole thing, but I wanted to take a moment and review the provisions dedicated to transparency and House reforms.

The transparency provisions can be boiled down to four central ideas:

• All bills must be published online for three days prior to coming up for a vote
• All bills must cite their Constitutional authority
• Any lawmaker is allowed to offer an amendment that reduces government spending
• Ending the practice of coupling bills to "must-pass" legislation and forcing legislation to deal with one issue at a time

Of all these ideas, the first one is probably the strongest politically and actually has quite a few supporters already. The "Read the Bill" movement is now being embraced openly.

I'm also surprised there's no mention of reforming the earmark process. Conservatives have long argued that earmarks are a "gateway drug" to more government spending, but this "pledge" doesn't mention the issue.

Consequences!

At least eight Bell, CA officials have been arrested following its salary scandal:

At least eight city of Bell officials were arrested Tuesday morning, a source said, as L.A. County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley prepared to announce criminal charges in the municipal salary scandal.

Former Bell City Manager Robert Rizzo, whose high salary sparked the outrage that led to the investigations of the city, was among those arrested in the sweep. No details have been released, but a source not authorized to speak publicly about the case said that Rizzo; former Assistant City Manager Angela Spaccia; Mayor Oscar Hernandez; Councilmembers Luis Artiga, Teresa Jacobo and George Mirabal; and former Councilmembers George Cole and Victor Bello were among those arrested.

Definitely a nice coda to the story we brought you back in July. Of course, they're entitled to a presumption of innocence until all the evidence is presented, but it does not look good for the officials.

State of the Election: 41 days to go

With 41 days until November's election, I thought it would be interesting to take a look at how the candidates' fundraising numbers compare. Are the massive amounts of enthusiasm on the Republican side counterbalancing the traditional fundraising advantages enjoyed by the state's three Democratic incumbents? Read through to find out.

These numbers are not as current as I would prefer. The reports are from June 30th and do not reflect recent developments that would give citizens a more accurate picture of the fundraising landscape. However, because the FEC only requires quarterly reports, this is what we'll work with. I'll be sure to update you when the new numbers are reported.

All of these numbers come courtesy of OpenSecrets.org, a great resource for learning about the intersection of money and politics in America. You can check out their Nevada page here.

Here are the results:

Candidate	Raised	Spent	Cash on Hand
Harry Reid (I, Sen)	$19,198,455	$11,579,202	$8,940,302
Sharron Angle (Sen)	$3,546,644	$1,778,973	$1,767,671
Shelley Berkley (I, CD-1)	$1,908,323	$1,006,632	$1,754,923
Kenneth Wegner (CD-1)	$51,179	$50,047	$1,631
Dean Heller (I, CD-2)	$1,065,035	$534,137	$664,656
Nancy Price (CD-2)	$0	$0	$0
Dina Titus (I, CD-3)	$1,672,143	$546,847	$1,204,552
Joe Heck (CD-3)	$603,579	$241,440	$362,138

In each and every race, the incumbent has out-raised and out-spent their challenger by at least double. This reflects a well-known structural advantage of incumbency, namely, the easy access to money. For these reports, it does not appear that GOP enthusiasm has come close to erasing the fundraising advantage traditionally enjoyed by incumbents. But, of course, these numbers only date to June 30th, so the next quarterly report might show something different.

In the Senate race, Democratic incumbent Harry Reid has raised 5.41 times more than Republican challenger Sharron Angle and spent 6.51 times more. Much ink has been spent on this race, so I'll spare you my amateur political prognostications and dive into more depth on Nevada's three House races.

In the Congressional District 1 race, Democratic incumbent Shelley Berkley has raised 37.29 times more than her challenger, Republican Kenneth Wegner, while spending 20.11 times more. A popular Congresswoman in a Democratic stronghold, Berkley is expected to cruise to re-election.

In the Congressional District 2 race, incumbent Dean Heller faces a nominal -- and underfunded -- challenge from Democrat Nancy Price. In fact, as of June 30th, Price had no campaign contributions to report to the FEC. Heller is in many ways the Republican version of Shelley Berkley: a popular Congressman in a very Republican district, his re-election is all but assured.

In the only really competitive House race this year in Nevada, Congressional District 3 finds freshman Democrat Dina Titus battling against former state Senator Joe Heck. While Titus has a fundraising advantage, it is the smallest among her House colleagues in the state. She has raised 2.77 times more than Heck while spending 2.26 times as much. CD 3 is a classic bellwether district. It was represented by a Republican since its creation in 2000 until Titus won the seat in 2008. This is the kind of district Republicans must win if they have any hope of re-capturing the majority in the House.

So there you have it. All-in-all, pretty much what you'd expect. Incumbents are raising (and spending) more money than their opponents, Harry Reid has a large war-chest and CD-3 is going to be a nail-biter.

Campaign transparency is not that hard

In an attempt to show that more robust campaign disclosure requirements are not burdensome, Secretary of State Ross Miller has announced he will be posting his campaign finance reports online:

In an effort to convince his fellow elected officials that filing campaign contribution and expenditure reports online and before early voting is not too onerous for candidates, Secretary of State Ross Miller said he will do so voluntarily in advance of the Nov. 2 general election.

Miller has submitted a bill draft request for consideration by the 2011 Legislature to move the filing dates of the reports up so the information would be available to residents before they vote. Miller, who sought similar legislation without success in 2009, also wants the reports filed electronically so voters and others can search the information more easily.

Presently, campaign disclosure laws in Nevada don't require timely disclosure. Current law states the reports aren't due until a week before the general election. By that time, early voting has been going on for 10 days. Plus, if a candidate mails in his or her reports there is a chance the reports won't even get posted online until only a day or two before the election. The reports themselves are unwieldy, unsearchable and often written in the candidate's inscrutable handwriting. It would be difficult to design a less transparent system of campaign disclosure.

This might be changing however, as 63 out of the 65 candidates who responded to TransparentNevada's transparency survey expressed support for making campaign finance data easily searchable. Despite Ross Miller's announcement, he is not one of them.

But still, citizens who care about transparency should commend Miller's actions and hope other candidates will do the same.

Sheila Leslie: I believe in transparency, but I don't want to share what I believe

She didn't say those exact words, but, as the Nevada News Bureau reports, that's the takeaway of her comments regarding TransparentNevada's transparency questionnaire of elected officials.

Assemblywoman Sheila Leslie, D-Reno, who is running for the Washoe Senate 1 seat, said she supports transparency in government but is not responding to the survey because of her view that the NPRI has a clear political bias and a response would give the group undeserved credibility.

"I’m accountable to the voters, I’m not accountable to a conservative think tank," she said. "It gives them a credibility that I don’t think they deserve. But I’m happy to respond directly to my constituents and certainly do support transparency in government."

Oh the irony. It seems like if you really believed in transparency, you'd also be transparent in sharing your beliefs on transparency. And for the record all TransparentNevada did was ask the questions and report the candidates' answers, including comments.

It's too bad as well, because transparency isn't a partisan issue and neither is letting voters know what you believe. In TransparentNevada's transparency questionnaire numerous candidates from all parties informed voters on where they stood on a variety of transparency issues. Voters will now get to make a more educated decision about those candidates.

On a national level transparency has brought natural rivals together. Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) and Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) — a liberal Democrat and a conservative Republican, respectively — teamed up for the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 which led to the creation of USASpending.gov.

If you are a constituent of Shelia Leslie's and would like to know her opinion on the questions from our transparency survey, you can reach her by email at sheila.leslie@sbcglobal.net or by phone at (775) 333-6564.

Oceguera proposes two-year cooling off period

It appears Arberry's little stunt might be the straw the breaks the camel's back:

Assembly Majority Leader John Oceguera announced Wednesday he will propose a two-year cooling off period before former legislators can serve as legislative lobbyists.

His announcement comes a day after the Clark County Commission rejected a contract to allow former Assemblyman Morse Arberry, D-Las Vegas, to serve as a lobbyist for the district courts and justices courts in Clark County.

Plenty of other states have implemented cooling off periods like this and are doing just fine.

It still faces considerable hurdles — we're asking for politicians to voluntarily deny themselves cushy post-Legislature jobs, after all — but the backlash to Arberry's actions might be severe enough to continue to drive this issue.

County agrees to televise Erik Scott inquest

From the Review-Journal:

The coroner's inquest for the fatal police shooting of Erik Scott at the Summerlin Costco will be televised on Clark County's cable channel.

Commissioners on Tuesday approved leaving Channel 4 open Sept. 22-24 for a live broadcast of the hearing and asked county staff to look into airing future inquests.

"There was such an overwhelming outcry for public transparency," said Commissioner Steve Sisolak, who suggested broadcasting Scott's inquest. "I think it's a good idea to make this transparent."

The Clark County Commission has done a good job of supporting transparency this past week. First they rejected the Court system's request to hire Morse Arberry as their lobbyist and now they're televising the inquest. Two isolated cases may not signal a trend, but it's encouraging to see the Commission taking these actions on issues involving ethics and transparency.

Arberry denied lobbying job

Clark County has decided not to hire former Assemblyman Morse Arberry as a lobbyist for the court system:

Clark County commissioners voted 5-2 today to deny the Clark County court system's request to hire former state Assemblyman Morse Arberry as a lobbyist.

Some commissioners said they opposed the courts or anyone else using public funds to hire a lobbyist for the state Legislature.

Other commissioners said they didn't mind the court system having a lobbyist but opposed hiring a former assemblyman without a "cooling-off" period. Arberry resigned his post in the Assembly last week.

All things considered, I'm actually not surprised at the outcome.

Despite the historically cozy relationship between Nevada politicians and special interests, Arberry's move was just too nakedly self-serving to pass by unnoticed.

Arberry's open and honest contempt for "cooling off periods" showed that he was planning on capitalizing on the connections he made during his time in public office on behalf of his client.

While I'm sure most politicians-turned-lobbyists really do think that, most also realize that saying it isn't the wisest thing to do.

TransparentNevada on Face to Face

A quick follow-up to yesterday's announcement: You can watch Andy Matthews and Jon Ralston discuss TransparentNevada's recently released survey results at this link:

Click here to watch.

(Skip to the third segment. I would embed the video but KVBC's code is being a pain.)

NPRI on Face to Face tonight

Be sure to tune into Face to Face hosted by Jon Ralston tonight.

NPRI's Andy Matthews is scheduled to be a guest on the program, and he'll be talking about the results of TransparentNevada's new transparency survey of candidates for Nevada's legislative and constitutional offices.

Face to Face airs at 6:30 p.m. on KSNV Channel 3 in Las Vegas, KRNV Channel 4 in Reno and KENV Channel 10 in Elko.

To see how candidates in your district responded, check out the questionnaire results here.

Where Nevada candidates stand on transparency issues

Be sure to check out the TransparentNevada homepage today as TransparentNevada has just released the results of a survey of candidates for Nevada's legislative and constitutional offices on the issue of government transparency.

The questionnaire contained six questions for candidates to answer, including "Do you support putting Nevada's checkbook online in a searchable format, as states such as Missouri and Texas have done?" and "Do you support applying Nevada's open-meeting law to the Legislature?"

More than 55 candidates responded to the survey, and you can view their responses right here.

TransparentNevada will continue to add responses to its website as they come in, so if a candidate in your district or that you know hasn't answered, ask him or her to answer these six questions. Citizens should know where candidates stand on transparency issues.

Also, here's NPRI's press release announcing the results.